Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.c > #66453

Re: C89 compatibility question

From "Bill Cunningham" <nospam@nspam.invalid>
Newsgroups comp.lang.c
Subject Re: C89 compatibility question
Date 2015-07-27 14:36 -0400
Organization A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID <mp5tk3$ll0$1@dont-email.me> (permalink)
References <mp5agt$sos$1@dont-email.me> <mp5k0p$n7h$1@solani.org>

Show all headers | View raw

"Philipp Klaus Krause" <pkk@spth.de> wrote in message 
news:mp5k0p$n7h$1@solani.org...

> You could use bitfields.

    I have this link.
http://www.tutorialspoint.com/cprogramming/c_bit_fields.htm

I'm a little confused as to why 2 1 byte elements of a struct take up 4 
bytes. But I will keep looking at this. Is this "bit field" thing only work 
in structs (or unions) ?

Bill

Back to comp.lang.c | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

C89 compatibility question "Bill Cunningham" <nospam@nspam.invalid> - 2015-07-27 09:10 -0400
  Re: C89 compatibility question Philipp Klaus Krause <pkk@spth.de> - 2015-07-27 17:50 +0200
    Re: C89 compatibility question "Bill Cunningham" <nospam@nspam.invalid> - 2015-07-27 12:25 -0400
    Re: C89 compatibility question "Bill Cunningham" <nospam@nspam.invalid> - 2015-07-27 14:36 -0400
  Re: C89 compatibility question Thomas Richter <thor@math.tu-berlin.de> - 2015-07-27 19:54 +0200
    Re: C89 compatibility question "Bill Cunningham" <nospam@nspam.invalid> - 2015-07-27 14:23 -0400
      Re: C89 compatibility question Barry Schwarz <schwarzb@dqel.com> - 2015-07-27 17:24 -0700
        Re: C89 compatibility question "Bill Cunningham" <nospam@nspam.invalid> - 2015-07-28 13:57 -0400
    Re: C89 compatibility question "Bill Cunningham" <nospam@nspam.invalid> - 2015-07-27 14:27 -0400
  Re: C89 compatibility question Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-07-27 11:51 -0700
    Re: C89 compatibility question "Bill Cunningham" <nospam@nspam.invalid> - 2015-07-27 14:53 -0400
    Re: C89 compatibility question "Bill Cunningham" <nospam@nspam.invalid> - 2015-07-27 18:10 -0400
      Re: C89 compatibility question Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-07-27 16:22 -0700
        Re: C89 compatibility question "Bill Cunningham" <nospam@nspam.invalid> - 2015-07-28 09:28 -0400
          Re: C89 compatibility question Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-07-28 10:36 -0700

csiph-web